If you really think that's an objective study based on facts, then you might be surprised to learn that CNW Research is a marketing company... and that's exactly what this article is: marketing.

 

I am not taking the article as fact, but just something to think about. Someone asked to post the link to the article, so I did.

 

Simply not false? Haha... Yeah, we know what you meant.

Every time someone posts a link to that article or the article itself, you in particular come on to remind everyone that it's "false" or whatever. Could you please provide information on that? We keep seeing this article - but no counterpoints besides people saying it isn't true.

It is suspect in it's entirety but a lot of points seem to make sense. We know you and residentsmurf need to defend the honor of the Prius, but it would be cool to see something other than your opinions in particular combined with your unique high fuel economy achieved when others are experiencing not so impressive numbers (for example).

 

OK. Some examples:

0) The study estimates that a Hummer will last 300K miles, and a Prius only 100K. How many recent American SUVs do YOU think are going to last 300K? How many 100K+ Toyotas are there? While not a factual error, it certainly is indicative of the ****ty assumptions they make.

1) CNW claim that the hybrid batteries are not recycled. This is just not true - toyota recycles every part of battery that it receives - metals, plastics, everything. Basic factual error.

2) These studies (actual peer reviewed studies by MIT, not marketing BS) conclude that the majority (80-85%) of the total lifetime energy use of a vehicle comes from the driving stage, with the remainder coming from the remaining stages of a vehicle life, whereas the CNW study shows these percentages to be reversed.

3) Two Toyota models mentioned in the report, the Scion xA and xB sold only in the USA, are engineered with the same processes, built on the same assembly line, transported and shipped together, distributed through the same dealer network, have the same engines and transmissions, are about the same weight (within 50 lbs.), and have very similar fuel consumption ratings (one just over 35 mpg combined, the other just below 35), yet the CNW study shows the lifetime energy use of these vehicles to be very different (53 per cent).

 

You missed my point - this is pretty much just more of your conjecture. At this point there has been enough talk about what you think about the article. If this is going to mean anything beyond your conclusions of an article we need to see some of those sources that so handily debunked the article.

A few points though...

0). Why not with the Hummer - sure it sucks, but that is beside the point - my dad had a Chevy pickup that he sold w/ 468k miles. He also had an Oldsmobile that we used for road trips that had well over 600k miles when it was put to death - as far as we knew, original engine. Everyone knows Toyotas last forever, but hybrids are MUCH more complicated and even you have to admit they have not proven themselves - they haven't had the chance of time yet. Time will tell on this one. Honestly this points more to your deductions of the info in the article than their "****ty" assumptions.

1) Toyota receives and recycles batteries? Huh - are you referring to failed units in cars? Have there already been failed units in such a short time? Even so, no one here has shared any proof of this.

2) Huh? Show us a study, an article, a link, anything. Again though - those studies cannot be based on hybrids since not one of them should have completed a life cycle yet, so the data would be completely immaterial. Unless I am missing something (entirely possible).

3) Ohhhhhhhhkay....?

 

What are they marketing? Are they trying to sell Hummers? This doesn't make any sense (why the information would be wrong simply because it's from a marketing company). If they were saying that hybrids suck and you should buy a Hyundai or something then you might have something there.

 

Its not wrong simply because they are a marketing company, it makes it extremely suspect. Add to that that a marketing co simply isn't qualified to do a scientific study AND that unlike all the other studies, it not peer review means its basically as useful for analysis as what you hear from the crazy guy on Market St.

 

somebody call Adam and Jamie from MythBusters!

 

some priuses drive faster than me 280 rush hour is crazy. Most pull over for me when in the fast lane.

its not only priuses, many dumb drivers head straight towards the fast lane and go 70. Then it usually takes about 10 people in a row to cut them off passing on the right for them to get a Fing clue.

Priuses should be able to use the fast lane as long as they have the autobahn mentality. It was a good way for California to sell an extra 1000 priuses or whatever the # was, because i sure as hell dont have the money for one.

 

0) Agreed this is my conjecture.

1) This is directly from Toyota. Batteries may need to be recycled for a number of reasons, including failure, abuse, overheating or the car getting totalled:


2) "On the Road in 2020: An Assessment of the Future of Transportation Technology". Andrew Burnham, Michael ****, and Paula Moon at the Center for Transportation Research of Argonne National Labs recently gave presentation called "Energy and Emission Effects of the Vehicle Cycle". Heather L. MacLean and Lester B. Lave of Carnegie Mellon University also published a lifecycle study showing that CNW's assertions are simply not correct. Unfortunately, I cannot provide these articles to you for copyright reasons, but if you have a JSTOR account somewhere, you can get them.

For arguments sake, lets take an assertion that ' Again though - those studies cannot be based on hybrids since not one of them should have completed a life cycle yet, so the data would be completely immaterial." Hrmm, that would be that CNW's 'research' is completely invalid as well, right?

Or, assuming that there are people qualified to do lifecycle analysis before the lifecycle is complete, we'd expect them to be experts in the field, right? Like, maybe, scientists at Argonne Lab and MIT? And we'd expect that research to be concluded as reasonable by other's in the field via a method like, say, peer review? Indeed we would. Which research in the field has met those requirements? The MIT and Argonne Labs studies. Which hasn't? The CNW study.

 

Thanks for providing the sources! I hope you understand why this is important. Good to hear that Toyota is actually making efforts in that direction.

It is a shame that we cannot read the articles that have debunked the CNW report as this still makes it difficult to buy when it's put forth as "the facts exist, I just cannot show you." Again I hope you understand. I am not saying the facts aren't there, just that it would be cool to be able to read about it myself.

I thought that the CNW study was based on manufacturer projections of the lifespan of the vehicle. I have not seen the actual study, but went back and re-read the article and did not see anywhere that the info came from Toyota. They quote 100k miles as "the life expectancy of the hybrid" and I personally would seriously need to see that backed up. I could see the battery system only lasting that long or something, but the car itself should go further I would hope.

It is important to note that comparing projected lifespans of vehicles is quite different from quoting statsistics of what percentage of a vehicle's energy use is in what stage of it's life. The former is based on projections which anyone can have (or pull our of their ****) while the latter should be based on real-world results - of which non could be obtained for any hybrid since there should not be a majority of them that are at end of life yet. Make sense?

All this being said, I still whole-heartedly believe that if someone were really environmentally and economically conscious they would not even consider a Prius or any other hybrid. Again, that article has a point about the difference in cost between a Scion xB, xA or a Yaris or something over a Prius. You can buy a lot of fuel for $10,000 and I flat out gurantee you that the simplicity of an xA, xB or Yaris will have it last MUCH longer than a Prius and do everything in it's life at a much lower cost and a lower impact (overall) to the environment.

There is a lot to be said for hybrid technology, but as far as environment and economic reasons go - it's not all the way there yet.